Car stolen from private parking lot; Who is accountable? Delhi Court orders FIR against officials and contractor

The order came after the Court found that the car was lifted in violation of the law and High Court directions on the removal of “end-of-life” vehicles.

The case was heard by Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Rishabh Kapoor at Dwarka Courts, who passed the order on September 1, 2025, while dealing with a complaint filed by Sushil Kumar Gupta.

According to the complaint, Gupta’s Honda City car (DL-4CAH-1100) was parked in the designated parking area of Ordnance Apartments, Vikas Puri, on December 18, 2022. When he returned from work, the car was missing. He lodged an e-FIR under Section 379 IPC (theft) at Vikas Puri Police Station. The case was assigned to Head Constable Rajesh Kumar for investigation.

Gupta alleged that no effective investigation was carried out, and later he discovered that his car had been taken away by Pineview Technology Pvt. Ltd. on the directions of MCD officials, claiming that the vehicle’s registration had expired. He further alleged collusion between the contractor, the civic body, and the investigating officer, who filed a cancellation report without proper inquiry.

The complainant also pointed out that he had moved a civil suit to prevent the scrapping of his car, which is still pending.

Gupta’s counsel contended that the car was parked in his society’s private parking area and not being driven on the road. Therefore, the removal violated directions of the Delhi High Court, which had clarified in several cases that National Green Tribunal (NGT) orders banning 15-year-old petrol vehicles and 10-year-old diesel vehicles applied only to vehicles “plying” on roads, not those parked in private premises.

He argued that taking away the car amounted to theft and caused wrongful loss to the complainant.

In its Action Taken Report (ATR), the police stated that Pineview Technology was under contract with the MCD to remove end-of-life vehicles. The contractor produced a removal order dated December 28, 2022, issued by MCD for lifting Gupta’s vehicle, which had allegedly completed its permissible life on January 6, 2022.

The police said the removal was carried out under NGT directions in the case Vardhman Kaushik v. Union of India.

After reviewing the records, the court noted that the removal order relied upon by the MCD and its contractor had never been communicated or published in advance to the complainant, as required under Supreme Court and Delhi High Court rulings.

The Court cited a 2023 Delhi High Court order (Seema Chopra v. Govt. of NCT Delhi and connected petitions) which had clarified that NGT’s 2015 directions did not authorize seizure of parked cars, only their challaning. The High Court also emphasized that proper public notices must be issued before authorities take action against such vehicles.

Judge Kapoor observed: “The material on record, rather suggests that at the time when the vehicle was lifted by proposed accused no.1, same was parked in the private parking space of the complainant's residential Society and at that time, the complainant was even not in knowledge that such act was done by or with the backing of some governmental agency.”

"The position of law as discussed above clearly reflects that the orders issued by Hon'ble NGT are not applicable to the end of life vehicles parked in the private parking spaces as same does not fall within the purview of definition of ''Plying ''," the Court said. 

The Court found that crucial aspects had been ignored by the police in their preliminary inquiry, including the complicity of MCD officials and the actual whereabouts of the car. Since the evidence was not within the complainant’s control and required official records and police verification, the judge ruled that an FIR must be registered.

The Court directed the Station House Officer (SHO) of Vikas Puri Police Station to register an FIR under Section 379 read with Section 34 IPC against Pineview Technology Pvt. Ltd. and the concerned MCD officials and to conduct a thorough investigation. "The present application is accordingly allowed and SHO PS Vikas Puri is hereby directed to register the case FIR for offence u/s 379 r/w 34 IPC against proposed accused no. 1 i..e Pineview Technology Pvt. Ltd and proposed accused no. 2 i.e. the concerned officials/officers of Municipal Corporation of Delhi and initiate the investigation in accordance with law," it ordered. 

The SHO was also asked to file a compliance report and update the Court on the status of the investigation by the next hearing on November 3, 2025.